Village Buildings bibliography: Difference between revisions

this is the bibliography / references section for [[Village_Buildings|Village Buildings]] book / article collection.&nbsp;<br/> Currently, it lists all sources as one list, alphabetical by primary author.&nbsp; Primary government bodies are listed by location name, i.e. "Portland, City of" rather than "City of Portland".&nbsp;&nbsp;

*Agamben, Giorgio. (1998). ''Homo sacer: Sovereign power and bare life''. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. br /> &nbsp; See especially Ch.7, "The Camp as the 'Nomos' of the Modern". <blockquote><br /> ''&nbsp;"In his main work "Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life" (1998), Giorgio Agamben analyzes an obscure figure of Roman law that poses fundamental questions about the nature of law and power in general. Under the laws of the Roman Empire, a man who committed a certain kind of crime was banned from society and all of his rights as a citizen were revoked. He thus became a "homo sacer" (sacred man). In consequence, he could be killed by anybody, while his life on the other hand was deemed "sacred", so he could not be sacrificed in a ritual ceremony." [...]'' ''.<br /> &nbsp; "Agamben opines that laws have always assumed the authority to define "bare life" — zoe, as opposed to bios, that is 'qualified life' — by making this exclusive operation, while at the same time gaining power over it by making it the subject of political control. The power of law to actively separate "political" beings (citizens) from "bare life" (bodies) has carried on from Antiquity to Modernity — from, literally, Aristotle to Auschwitz. Aristotle, as Agamben notes, constitutes political life via a simultaneous inclusion and exclusion of "bare life": as Aristotle says, man is an animal born to life (Gk. ζῆν, zen), but existing with regard to the good life (εὖ ζῆν, eu zen) which can be achieved through politics. Bare life, in this ancient conception of politics, is that which must be transformed, via the State, into the "good life"; that is, bare life is that which is supposedly excluded from the higher aims of the state, yet is included precisely so that it may be transformed into this "good life". Sovereignty, then, is conceived from ancient times as the power which determines what or who is to be incorporated into the political body (in accord with its bios) by means of the more originary exclusion (or exception) of what is to remain outside the political body—which is at the same time the source of that body's composition (zoe). According to Agamben, biopower, which takes the bare lives of the citizens into its political calculations, may be more marked in the modern state, but has essentially existed since the beginnings of sovereignty in the West, since this structure of ex-ception is essential to the core concept of sovereignty. '' ''.<br />'' ''&nbsp;"Agamben would continue to expand the theory of the state of exception first introduced in "Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life", ultimately leading to the "State of Exception" in 2005. Instead of leaving a space between law and life, the space where human action is possible, the space that used to constitute politics, he argues that politics has "contaminated itself with law" in the state of exception. Because "only human action is able to cut the relationship between violence and law", it becomes increasingly difficult within the state of exception for humanity to act against the State."'' </blockquote>

*Allport, Gordon W. (1954). ''The Nature of Prejudice.'' Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1954. Full text available at: <nowiki>https://archive.org/details/TheNatureOfPrejudice</nowiki>. <blockquote>''"The checkerboard of prejudice in the United States is perhaps the most intricate of all."'' .<br />''"Everywhere on earth we find a condition of separateness among groups. People mate with their own kind. They eat, play, reside in homogeneous clusters...Much of this automatic cohesion is due to nothing more than convenience...most of the business of life can go on with less effort it we stick together with our own kind." (p.17-18).'' .<br />''"Open-mindedness is considered to be a virtue. But, strictly speaking, it cannot occur. A new experience must be redacted into old categories. We cannot handle each even freshly in its own right." p.20'' .<br />''"Contrary evidence is not admitted and allowed to modify the generalization; rather it is perfunctorily acknowledged but excluded. Let us call this the 're-fencing' device. When a fact cannot fit into a mental field, the exception is acknowledged, but the field is hastily fenced in again and not allowed to remain dangerously open." p.23.'' <br />''"the very act of affirming our way of live often leads us to the brink of prejudice." p.24''</blockquote>